By Mark J. Valencia

Mattis’ China Visit and Rising Tension in the South China Sea

In the run up to US Secretary of Defense James Mattis’ first visit to China from June 27-28, 2018, he
said: “I want to go in without poisoning the well and do a lot of listening.” Well
he certainly got an earful regarding the South China Sea. Indeed, it is hard to imagine how he could have expected otherwise,
having already “poisoned the well” by repeatedly and publicly calling out China
regarding its policy and actions there. Moreover, deeper political currents are
running and China’s leaders are certainly aware of this.

Under President
Donald J. Trump, the US has clearly stepped up its Freedom of Navigation
Operations (FONOPs) and regular naval and air patrols in the South China Sea.
Earlier this year, three US aircraft carrier battle groups conducted exercises
there. But like a spike on an upward trending curve, the US has recently turned
up the heat with a flurry of statements and actions. After officially
identifying China as a “strategic competitor” and a “revisionist power,” the US
began implementing a more confrontational policy in May. First the
White House announced that there would be “near-term and
long-term consequences” for China’s “militarization” there. The Mattis-led
Pentagon then rescinded its invitation to China to participate in the 2018 Rim
of the Pacific Exercise because “China’s
behavior [in the South China Sea] is inconsistent with the principles and
purposes of the RIMPAC exercise.”

Ironically, in
doing so, the US “is cutting off its nose to spite its face.” China’s
participation advantages the US military by providing it an opportunity to
demonstrate its deterrent of technological superiority and to better understand
China’s military strengths and weaknesses. This public insult was followed by a two-ship
FONOP that targeted China’s maritime claims in the
Paracel Islands, including Woody Island, a particularly sensitive military
outpost for China.

Then, at the
Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore, Mattis warned
China that the rescinding of the RIMPAC invitation was a
“relatively small consequence and that there are much larger consequences in
the future.” He also asserted that China’s “militarization” of its occupied
features in the South China Sea is “for purposes of intimidation and coercion” —
a possible violation of the UN Charter’s prohibition on the threat of use of
force.

Adding salt to
the open wound, a draft of the US Senate’s annual defense
policy bill stipulated that China could be readmitted to future
RIMPAC exercises four years hence if it made positive changes in its behavior
in the South China Sea.

On June 6, US
nuclear capable B52 bombers overflew the China-claimed Scarborough Shoal.
Intended or not, the fact that this occurred on the anniversary of WWII D-Day
may have been interpreted as sending a “special” warning. The US is now
reportedly considering raising
the stakes by “intensifying” its FONOPs in the region and sailing
an aircraft carrier through the Taiwan Strait
for the first time in over a decade. These statements and actions were
issued against a background of rising US-China tension over the status of
Taiwan and an incipient trade war. The US has labeled “fair” trade as a
national security issue.

According to Jia
Qingguo, Associate Dean of Beijing University’s School of International
Relations, it is important to curb “a downward spiral in relations.”

China has
responded in kind to what it sees as a growing US threat. For example, its Air
Force spokesperson said that the landing of nuclear
capable bombers at Woody Island was
training to improve its ability to “reach all territory, conduct strikes at any
time and strike in all directions as well as preparation for the battle for the
South China Sea”. It also undertook its own major naval and air
exercises in the South China Sea and around Taiwan, including
a live fire exercise in the East China Sea that some saw as a warning to
Taiwan, Japan, and the US. Moreover, it continues to enhance its “defences”
on the features it occupies to what some say is an unacceptable level.

China is gaining
on the US in soft power in the region — the capability to use economic or
cultural influence to shape the preferences of others. Indeed, a major victory
for China was the Philippines’ decision to put in abeyance the
international arbitration decision in its favor against China, and to shift its
foreign policy to a more neutral position between China and the US.

US policy and
actions so far have been ineffective in making China change its policy and
tactics. Indeed, short of use of force, China is unlikely to roll back its “gains,”
and even in the event of a US threat or use of force it may well play tit-for
tat over what it considers its right to occupy and fortify (“defend”) its
sovereign territory. After repeatedly declaring that sovereignty over its
territory — including its features in the South China Sea — is a core national
security interest, for its leadership to do otherwise would be to risk its
domestic legitimacy.

Indeed, when
Mattis brought up the US’ South China Sea concerns with China’s President Xi
Jinping, Xi replied in no uncertain terms that “Our stance
is steadfast and clear-cut when it comes to China’s sovereignty and territorial
integrity. We cannot
lose one inch of territory passed down by our ancestors.” For China that includes Taiwan.

Some think China
assumes that the US will not go to war with it over the South China Sea issues
because the question of ownership of militarily indefensible flyspecks and the
resources there is not a core US national security interest.

Despite US
attempts to paint Mattis’ China meetings in a positive light, it is clear that
the overall relationship is deteriorating
in many spheres. According to Jia Qingguo,
Associate Dean of Beijing University’s School of International Relations, it is
important to curb “a downward spiral in relations.” He added that actions by
both countries regarding the South China Sea and Taiwan were intensifying due
to “suspicion and speculation.”

I agree and am
not optimistic that relations will improve during the Trump Presidency.